- Lead
- 2,225
- Total
- 6,915
- vs nation
- R+30.7
- Turnout
- 65.3%
Lake County, MI
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 65.3% of 10,663 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 1,658
- Total
- 6,323
- vs nation
- R+30.7
- Turnout
- 65.0%
- Lead
- 1,220
- Total
- 5,358
- vs nation
- R+24.9
- Turnout
- 58.0%
- Lead
- 265
- Total
- 5,310
- vs nation
- D+1.1
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 650
- Total
- 5,292
- vs nation
- D+5.0
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 172
- Total
- 5,246
- vs nation
- D+5.7
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 623
- Total
- 4,693
- vs nation
- D+12.8
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 1,393
- Total
- 4,394
- vs nation
- D+23.2
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+32.2MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 12,5632024 5-year
- Median household income
- $50,8052024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 75.5%2024 5-year
- Black
- 7.8%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 9.3%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+42.9 in 1964MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+60.9 in 1904MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Henderson County, IL · twin score 85.4
Midterm durability
Total general-election participants divided by same-year citizen voting-age population. These are total ballots or participating voters—not presidential candidate votes.
- 2024 total turnout
- 65.3%6,968 participants ÷ 10,663 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +14.0 ptsVolatile
- Drop-off versus state
- -1.2 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 51.4%–54.1%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 5,448 | 9,390 | 58.0% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 4,809 | 9,735 | 49.4% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 6,389 | 9,830 | 65.0% | A/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 5,312 | 10,410 | 51.0% | A/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 6,968 | 10,663 | 65.3% | A/A |
Sources and methods
- 2016: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 293/111.
- 2018: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 297/138.
- 2020: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 301/2.
- 2022: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 306/183.
- 2024: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 311/228.
Precinct data
Results by precinct
30 precincts · 6,915 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Pleasant Plains Township, Precinct 12Pleasant Plains Township, Precinct 12 | 320 | 455 | 13 | 788 | 40.6% | 57.7% | R+17.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Elk Township, Precinct 5Elk Township, Precinct 5 | 266 | 456 | 12 | 734 | 36.2% | 62.1% | R+25.9 |
| Precinct -Chase Township, Precinct 1Chase Township, Precinct 1 | 126 | 539 | 12 | 677 | 18.6% | 79.6% | R+61.0 |
| Precinct -Webber Township, Precinct 17Webber Township, Precinct 17 | 285 | 351 | 16 | 652 | 43.7% | 53.8% | R+10.1 |
| Precinct -Lake Township, Precinct 7Lake Township, Precinct 7 | 219 | 380 | 7 | 606 | 36.1% | 62.7% | R+26.6 |
| Precinct -Ellsworth Township, Precinct 6Ellsworth Township, Precinct 6 | 127 | 365 | 7 | 499 | 25.5% | 73.1% | R+47.7 |
| Precinct -Pinora Township, Precinct 11Pinora Township, Precinct 11 | 111 | 350 | 3 | 464 | 23.9% | 75.4% | R+51.5 |
| Precinct -Yates Township, Precinct 19Yates Township, Precinct 19 | 280 | 179 | 3 | 462 | 60.6% | 38.7% | D+21.9 |
| Precinct -Newkirk Township, Precinct 8Newkirk Township, Precinct 8 | 80 | 310 | 2 | 392 | 20.4% | 79.1% | R+58.7 |
| Precinct -Eden Township, Precinct 4Eden Township, Precinct 4 | 101 | 233 | 6 | 340 | 29.7% | 68.5% | R+38.8 |
| Precinct -Peacock Township, Precinct 10Peacock Township, Precinct 10 | 97 | 212 | 3 | 312 | 31.1% | 67.9% | R+36.9 |
| Precinct -Sauble Township, Precinct 15Sauble Township, Precinct 15 | 92 | 207 | 3 | 302 | 30.5% | 68.5% | R+38.1 |
| Precinct -Cherry Valley Township, Precinct 2Cherry Valley Township, Precinct 2 | 90 | 190 | 6 | 286 | 31.5% | 66.4% | R+35.0 |
| Precinct -Dover Township, Precinct 3Dover Township, Precinct 3 | 48 | 206 | 0 | 254 | 18.9% | 81.1% | R+62.2 |
| Precinct -Sweetwater Township, Precinct 16Sweetwater Township, Precinct 16 | 56 | 90 | 1 | 147 | 38.1% | 61.2% | R+23.1 |
| 0851488000001085-14880-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0851510000002085-15100-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0852280000003085-22800-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0852480000004085-24800-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0852526000005085-25260-00005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0852544000006085-25440-00006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0854432000007085-44320-00007 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0855748000008085-57480-00008 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0856312000010085-63120-00010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0856444000011085-64440-00011 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0856488000012085-64880-00012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0857168000015085-71680-00015 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0857774000016085-77740-00016 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0858506000017085-85060-00017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0858904000019085-89040-00019 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | −2.8% |
| 1896 | −23.3% |
| 1900 | −40.2% |
| 1904 | −60.9% |
| 1908 | −43.0% |
| 1912 | −4.3% |
| 1916 | −24.9% |
| 1920 | −53.7% |
| 1924 | −48.6% |
| 1928 | −47.0% |
| 1932 | +10.8% |
| 1936 | +9.9% |
| 1940 | −13.7% |
| 1944 | −18.0% |
| 1948 | −10.9% |
| 1952 | −15.7% |
| 1956 | −19.7% |
| 1960 | −4.6% |
| 1964 | +42.9% |
| 1968 | +13.9% |
| 1972 | +0.5% |
| 1976 | +15.3% |
| 1980 | +7.8% |
| 1984 | −7.0% |
| 1988 | +6.6% |
| 1992 | +25.5% |
| 1996 | +31.7% |
| 2000 | +13.3% |
| 2004 | +3.3% |
| 2008 | +12.3% |
| 2012 | +5.0% |
| 2016 | −22.8% |
| 2020 | −26.2% |
| 2024 | −32.2% |
U.S. House
Each row shows U.S. House votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
| Year | Vote lead | Democratic | Republican | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | R | 32.2%2,071 | 67.8%4,369 | 6,440 |
| 2020 | R | 33.8%2,003 | 66.2%3,923 | 5,926 |
U.S. Senate
Each row shows U.S. Senate votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
Governor
Each row shows Governor votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 9,217 |
| 2018 | 9,278 |
| 2020 | 10,028 |
| 2022 | 10,512 |
| 2024 | 11,194 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
+268 net domestic migration · 2025
Net +2,366 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $52,962 in average income, against $52,552 for residents who stayed — 1% higher. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+22.6 on average — 9.6 points more Democratic-leaning than Lake County, MI itself (R+32.2).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Kent County, MI57D+5.4
- Osceola County, MI56R+47.9
- Mason County, MI27R+21.4
- Mecosta County, MI27R+30.0
- Newaygo County, MI25R+42.8
- Ottawa County, MI25R+20.4
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Osceola County, MI49
- Kent County, MI46
- Mecosta County, MI30
- Mason County, MI29
Migration is one input to a place’s political change, not its cause — a shift can also come from residents changing their minds, generational turnover, or turnout. These figures describe the places people moved between; they do not measure how any mover voted.
| Year | Net domestic migration |
|---|---|
| 2011 | +8 |
| 2012 | +41 |
| 2013 | −12 |
| 2014 | +65 |
| 2015 | +355 |
| 2016 | +187 |
| 2017 | +176 |
| 2018 | −51 |
| 2019 | +23 |
| 2021 | +325 |
| 2022 | +468 |
| 2023 | +176 |
| 2024 | +337 |
| 2025 | +268 |
Lake County sits in Michigan's northern Lower Peninsula with one of the state's smallest populations, yet its lopsided presidential margins—exceeding 30 points in 2024—reflect a broader rural realignment visible across the Great Lakes region.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 42.9 points in 1964 and a Republican high of 60.9 points in 1904. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 6.0 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 32.2 points.
A population of 12,563, a 76% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $50,805 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Henderson County and Adams County.
The counties whose fingerprint — 2000–2024 trajectory, demographics, ancestry, religion — sits closest to this one, and why.
Twin score (0–100) = weighted cosine between tier-standardized fingerprints: presidential margins 2000–2024 with 12-yr trend and elasticity, ACS income, age, education, population and race, top reported ancestries, and religious adherence — chips name the closest-shared dimensions and the widest gap. Re-weight the groups in the twins explorer.
Browse places by community — income, education, race & ethnicity, language — all community cuts →
Compare two places, side by side
Twelve curated comparisons line up election history, demographics, and the divergence story for two places at a glance. Browse all comparisons →
Lake County, Michigan. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/26085/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.